Band 6.0 IELTS Writing Task 1 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 6.0 · Cambridge IELTS 11 · 2026-10-11

IELTS Writing Task 1 question

The charts below show the proportions of British students at one university in England who were able to speak other languages in addition to English, in 2000 and 2010

Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant.

Student answer (Band 6.0)

The pie chart gives information about the number of British students in a university who were able to speak more than one language along with English in 2000 and in 2010.

Overall, the chart shows that, in both 2000 and 2010, individually, the portion of learners who could not speak another language aside for English was huge. But the combined portion of pupils who could speak other foreign language was comparatively higher.

In 2000, the 30 out of 100 students could speak no language other than English. The rest of the 70 students could speak and understand other languages. The number of French speakers was 15. Furthermore, 20 speakers could speak Spanish in addition to English. Also 10 people could speak German. The rest had command over another language and some were even trilingual.

In 2010, the number of monolingual students increased to 35. Along with this, the number of trilingual students has increased from 10 to 15. Among the remaining 65 students, 10 spoke German, 10 had command over French, and 10 could speak Spanish.

In both charts of 2000 and 2010, the individual portion of monolingual students was larger than the other. But when combined, the portion of multilingual leaners were greater in number.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 5.5

You identify the main contrast between students speaking only English and those speaking additional languages, and several figures are accurate: for example, monolingual students rise from 30% to 35%, while German remains at 10%. However, some key information is incomplete or unclear. The 2000 figures for “another language” (15%) and “two other languages” (10%) are not reported, and the corresponding 2010 figures (20% and 15%) are also omitted. The overview is additionally confusing: saying the monolingual group was “huge” conflicts with saying the combined multilingual group was larger, and the latter comparison is not clearly explained. Report the categories consistently as proportions and give a concise, accurate overview of the main changes.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 5.5

The response has a recognisable structure, with an introduction, an overview, and separate paragraphs for each year. This helps the reader follow the basic comparison. However, progression is weakened by repetition: the final paragraph repeats the claim about monolingual students and multilingual learners without adding useful detail. Some links are also mechanical, such as “Furthermore,” “Also,” and “Along with this,” while “The rest” is used without specifying which categories or figures it refers to. The overview’s contrast between the “huge” monolingual portion and the larger combined multilingual portion is difficult to follow. Group the figures by meaningful trends and use clearer references to the chart categories to make the comparisons more cohesive.

Lexical Resource: Band 6.0

You use an adequate range of vocabulary for describing the charts, including “portion,” “monolingual,” “trilingual,” “combined,” and “increased.” These terms show some ability to vary your wording beyond basic descriptions. However, several choices are imprecise or unnatural for this task: “number” is used for percentages, “command over” is an awkward way to describe language ability, and “huge” is too informal and subjective for a chart summary. “Foreign language” also does not accurately distinguish the chart’s categories, which include another language and two other languages. Choose neutral, precise terms such as “proportion,” “spoke,” and “accounted for,” and use the chart’s category labels consistently.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 6.0

You use a mix of simple and more complex sentence forms, and most of the meaning remains clear. For instance, “In 2010, the number of monolingual students increased to 35” is a straightforward, understandable comparison, while the overview attempts a more complex contrast. Some grammatical errors remain. In “the 30 out of 100 students,” the article is unnecessary; “aside for English” has an incorrect preposition pattern; and “the portion of multilingual leaners were” has subject–verb disagreement. Tense is also inconsistent in “has increased” when describing the completed period from 2000 to 2010. Check articles, agreement, and past-tense consistency, and simplify sentences when needed to keep comparisons accurate.

See this exact question answered at other band scores. The same prompt compared across bands.

Browse more IELTS Writing model answers or get your own writing scored by the same AI examiner.